About the generation of similar words

[quimqu]

From yesterday's analysis it seemed clear that bursts were transversal throughout the Voynich. The theory was that perhaps the core of the burst, from which the similar tokens emerged, was a word that might be found a few pages earlier in the manuscript. This made me think that limiting burst detection to one page was perhaps wrong and I wanted to see what happens when I detect bursts with Levenshtein = 1 or Levenshtein = 2 throughout the text.

The surprise was these data (maybe it is a surprise to me and this was already studied, sorry then):

metric	Voynich	Natural
lev≤1 giant	~80%	5–34%
lev≤2 giant	~93–94%	58–82%
segmentation	83–90%	0–60%

In Voynich, whether in EVA or CUVA, we have a giant burst where word changes have a Levenshtein value of 1 that covers 80% of the tokens in the corpus, while in natural language only between 5 and 34% of the tokens are covered. The coverage increases with Levenshtein =2 to 93-94% in Voynich and between 58 and 82% in natural languages.

But what's more, of the words that fall outside the 93-94% in the Voynich with Lev.=2, these can be segmented into real subwords in 83% by EVA and 90% by CUVA. That is, practically all of the tokens in the manuscript can be explained in paths less than or equal to Levenshtein = 2, which does not happen in natural language.

This has made me think that perhaps we are facing a type of cipher that Rafal proposed to me with the Roman numerals. A codebook cipher. A natural language -> voynich dictionary was created prior to writing and was replaced word by word. The generation of the Voynich words was mechanical, with a system of substitution, addition or deletion, and was assigned to a natural word previously from a dictionary. It is an option that I am currently exploring and will post in a new thread apart from this one.